Practically Speaking

But Kyle, YOU mind is already made up, isn't it?  Why is that such a bad thing for others?

Kyle's reply: I did not say that was "such a bad thing" I am simply wondering if that was a possible reason for poor attendance.   

So what's Scott's take now that he's opened his mouth?

I'm thinking that $105M ($62.2 plus costs) isn't cheap in a year when the bottom's falling out of the economy and everything is beginning to take on that 1929 glow. What's more I'm thinking that, if pressed, we could agree that 30 to 50% of the changes really represent more 'wants' than 'needs'.

So if we run the process through one or two more referendums, we'll probably end up with a figure representing what we've really needed all along.

Anyone wants more frills and fancy stuff, send em out to Brookfield Academy where they can have all they can pay for!

Kyle's reply: I saw too many "wants" on the tour. Brookfield Academy (take a look at test scores and tuition, etc), by the way, converted a bowling alley for part of their school. 

If a person had absolutely no prior knowledge of the history of this referendum issue, it would be difficult to form a positive opinion. Board members, HSST, and ad hoc committees all failed to develop consensus on what was needed and/or necessary. This should give every Elmbrook taxpayer pause to consider whether the current proposal is reasonable or just the best they could come up with for a April vote. It's a lot of money for just a "oh well, let's just vote on something". I just think this project is too big for a group of parents to get their inexperienced arms around.

Hi Kyle, part of the brain washing mode of Mr. Gibson is to keep painting a different picture but the scene is the same. The committee's approach to the wanted remodeling is as you can see Gibson's Want's that have been colored needs. $ 105,000,000 is out of sight. Reminds me of the City Hall being remodeled foolishly once again to achieve nothing. I may be wrong on this but the reason Mr. Marquardt insisted on the remodeling was to make it more efficient, save some foot steps. Pencil pushers need more exercise not less. We all need that.

All those in charge say they listen to the public but in reality they do what they want, when they want all at tax payer expense.

Gibson's approach is of course like a lot of the other school systems . Just keep coming back asking for more and the public will get tired of it. In this case its a jam job with little time to make the public aware of the proposed folly with a huge sum of taxpayers dollars. To take another tour of the facility is a waste of time. Been there done that. Plans to the public came out as late as possible. Just part of the whole scheme to try and sneak it past the tax payer. MJS even is not covering it as the way they did the last outlandish referendum.

School Board is hoping that the taxpayer isn't aware of the $ 105,000,000 referendum at hand. It all just stinks out loud once again. The plans represent ridiculous wants with very few needs. In the mean time all maintenance will be marginal with the hopes of failures along the way so no one has a choice about what they do. "As long as we have to do this, we might as well do that"

The people that have dropped out of the school board race apparently never thought about their family's up until the race began and now suddenly there importance is paramount.That's fine, to be on the board and not have the time to do your job is out of balance also.

No need to go to the forum the individuals running are elected already before the election. No opposition at all. Done Deal.

It will be interesting to see the vote, I of course will once again vote No. Those people I know from the past are also going to vote No once again, they won't even look at the plans, just too many dollars for something that is working fine right now. As you know its not the building that makes the final product, its the Parental involvement in there child's education that makes the end product.

What is the solution, find some one else to replace Gibson, he is not listening to his boss, the tax payer, that is where the real problem lies. The previous vote was screaming loud but it was heard not by Mr. Gibson, "Time for a change"

Kyle's reply: Dr. Gibson was the replacement for Dr. Chronin (sp?), both wanted to see all the buildings replaced with new. At least with Dr. Gibson, we know what we have.

Having had school at the kitchen table for 13 years--including chemistry--I am very aware bricks and mortar do not make the student! :) 

Did you see the article about the EBS wants to add a wellness coordinator under the guise of saving on healthcare costs?  Since the teachers only pay 3% of their premiums, it seems the REAL way to cut costs is to have the teachers pay at least 25% of the premiums with much higher copays and deductibles.  With the kind of salaries they are getting they can afford to pay like those in the private sector pay.  Even medicare recipients pays a lot more.  With medicare charges deducted from benefits and a decent supplement, I pay 10% of my BENEFIT for healthcare insurance.  Let the teachers pay 10% of their salary if they don't like 25% of premium!

Kyle's reply: Yes, I saw the article.  While I do appreciate the district trying to keep costs down, I am not sure this is the way to do it. I know this a small thing, but I don't see why they would need to implement an incentive program that would cost $25,000 ($25 x 1,000 staff members--I know, a drop in the bucket) if the employee would already get a lower premium for signing on and a "free" health risk assessment. "Incentives have yet to be fully outlined but might include $25 for completing health risk assessments or subsidies on wellness tools, like pedometers. The details on initiatives and incentives would develop if the board approves the budget."

One problem with group insurance is that the premium is the same for the healthy person as well as the unhealthy lifestyle person. It is very hard to be equitible, especially since we all know of cases where the tea-totaler non smoker dies at age 60 and the 2 pack a day whiskey drinker coot lives to be 95.

Do you just make that 2 pack a day-er whiskey drinker pay a higher percentage of their premium?

I would have concerns that some screening and "wellness" measures are not thought to be healthy by all doctors. The doctors I see have a very different view of some of these practices.

This is a tough issue. Certainly encouraging healthy living is a good thing. I just don't know that we need a new position to do it.

Kyle, How did we get off on health and wellness? Back to the topic!

Perhaps, given his distinguished engineering credentials, Mr. Scott Berg would do us the favor of checking that ESD Tax Calculator in light of the numbers thus far known: $62.2M for the actual work = about $105M including interests and cost on a twenty year bond issue.

I have heard several people mention that the Tax Calculator does not seem to take into account the interest and bonding costs. Last thing we need is another referendum based upon Enron Accounting!

On the other hand, the district could solve this problem by dropping all of its disclaimers and assuring us that our annual tax increases will not under any circumstances exceed those given by its Tax Calculator!

Yea Uncle Matt!

Kyle's reply: Sorry Elf, I was just responding to a comment.  

You are right, 20 years of interest is not a pretty thought. 

VOTE "NO" APRIL 1

I am hoping for a big turnout again. I sure didn't want to spend weekend after weekend passing out fliers to energize the populace here.

If you read the aggregate comments above, you'd be hard pressed to understand that this is an outstanding, well-managed school district. For the most part, I think we pay a moderate price for a very high quality product, exactly where you want to be on a cost/value curve when our kid's future is at stake.

Where it begin.  I don't think anyone has been brain washed.  There are meetings on TV, committees, information packets, tours, you name it.  Is there perfect consensus?  Of course not.  We all have a different take on exactly what is needed.  No one gets a perfect match for their own desires.  In fact, nearly 40% of our community committed to paying nearly twice as much last April.  If we wait for perfection, the schools will rot into a pile of dust.  If this package is reasonably close, vote for it.

Should the schools have been better maintained over the years?  This is an easy charge to level, but it doesn't hold water.  These are truly old facilities, the kind of needed renovations can't be done with a million here and a million there.  It is time to invest.  Further, school boards back over the last four decades made the best decisions they could balancing the need to fund programs vs. physical plant.  We can't punish the current students or administrators for what they inherited.  In fact, money not spent on physical plant needs over the last four decades was not placed in a pile on the floor and burned--it was used to fund education.  If you have adult children who prospered in this district, be thankful that the system spend the money it did in the past, and recognize your obligation to the current students.

This bond does reflect the will of the people.  It is cut in half from the last time out.  Look at the information:  square footage down per classroom, number of classrooms down, etc.  We have two old schools, for $65M we can have two schools to go forward for decades.  This is smart money policy.  Further, this district is reflecting a fiscal conservative bent that exists in the community.  Unlike most districts around us, Elmbrook eliminated 4K (controversial, but the right decision, I think).  There is a serious discussion about the cost/benefit ratio of out-of-district enrollment.  I would encourage those who champion running a tight ship not to be "sore winners."  Your priorities have been served, but it is time to deal with these old buildings.

Is the economy bad?  You bet.  However, a twenty year bond will be around through three of four business cycles.  The need is now, and the interest rates are good.  This is local money spent at home, in our region. Governments often borrow and spend in economic downturns.  It is the right thing to do.

There has been great effort to focus on the $65M cost, even using the net cost, a technique never used in borrowing.  Welcome to the 21st Century folks.  In an era on half million and million dollar homes and quarter billion dollar hospitals, this is pretty reasonable.  Little has been said of the per home cost, now shaved to a mere $160 per year on average.  Remember that this is a large district, and it is these per household costs that matter most, and they are small.  I will avoid the cup-of-coffee per day arguments, but I will point out that we are down to rounding error for most peoples budgets.  Hot water heater fails--it will cost you more.  Fender bender with a $500 deductable?  How about the savings of a few low-energy light bulbs?  This is a pretty small dollar amount.  Most of us agree that something must be done, so let's assume that, for the sake of argument, that a third more could be cut out.  Are we going to have a redo over 3 twenty dollar bills per house?

Wants vs. needs.  Again, very subjective.  It is clear that we are sending our excellent teachers year in and year out into a suboptimal environment.  Name another working class of college educated people working in a worse environment in Brookfield.  We violate our own community standards every day in these buildings.

I am a proud parent in this system.  I lived in other cities, this is the best I've seen.  In the old days, we knew how to pull together to get things done.  The time is now for this system to fix the high schools.

Kyle's reply: Phew! Can't even begin to address any of that here, but, Contrarian, we finally found our common ground!  "Unlike most districts around us, Elmbrook eliminated 4K (controversial, but the right decision, I think)."

Well, since you mentioned health insurance, I thought you might like to hear what happened at the city's Finance Committee meeting on Tuesday, March 4.  

During the discussion formally authorizing the 2008 health insurance plan, Ald. Jerry Mellone stated he believes the city's health insurance appears to be very poor and not competitive with neighboring cities.  I suggested he make a legislative referral to the HR committee to review the plan.  

Perhaps you would like to call Ald. Jerry Mellone and describe your level of support for his idea of making the plan cover more city employee medical costs.

Kyle's reply: And I thought I was off topic! I will ask though. 

I'm a "no" vote. If the board had actually stuck to the HSST recommendation I would have had to reconsider. They didn't, so it makes a no vote very easy.

I think Contrarian makes a good case.  How far off of the HSST recommendation do you think we are, Cindy?

I am taking Contrarian's comment, along with Kathryn's "hurrah", and printing it out 100 times.  Then I'm going to grind it up into fine powder and use it to fertilize my flowers this Spring.  Another proud parent willing to spend any amount of someone else's money thinking it will improve education.  Baloney!

About Intewedm's comment:

"Another proud parent...."

I won't apologize for pride.  One of my kids was at Pilgrim Park when it became a Blue Ribbon School designated by the US Department of Education, an honor given to only 250 schools nationally.  Have you been in that place?  PPMS is a great school with great people doing great things.  My kids are pretty cool, too.  Some people lack the ability so be passionate about the important things.  Pity.

...."willing to spend any amount of someone else's money"....Now the civics lesson.  When your kids started school years ago, they didn't go to mud huts built the summer before.  They used the facilities built with the tax dollars of the generation before, and they built new facilities with current taxation.  Taxation is blind to whether or not you personally use a service.  I pay lots of taxes, and pay a good deal of other people's medicare, drug coverage, parks I don't use, etc.  I might disagree with a given government priority, but I disagree not  solely on the grounds that it doesn't affect me.  This is what it means to be in a community.  When Intewedm had his kids in school, grandparents, people married without children, people with kids in private or church school, single people and businesses footed the bill. That's the way this country works.  I also spoke to the "any amount" part.  It's not any amount--its $160 per home per year on average, a very small amount as I said earlier.

"....thinking it will improve education."  I didn't exactly say that.  These 1950's and 60's buildings are in need of renovation.  Some things (labs, computer supports, etc) might improve education, but mostly, I think we have an obligation to properly maintain the core institutions of our community.

Kyle's reply: Just a reminder, Elmbrook's per pupil cost last year was around twice that of the state average. As for the "it's $160 per home per year on average" that is the additional cost. (There is some variance as to exactly what the per cost per average is, but for now we will just use your figure.)

Let's just be clear that the school portion of our property tax bill is already 50% higher than our city tax portion and accounts for nearly half of our entire property tax bill. For my home (which is below average in valuation) I paid $2,164 last year, and that was only lower because we did not have as much revenue sharing(?) as in other years. I think we need to be sensitive to those who are retired, those who have less than average incomes in our community, and those who never had children in the system.

I am glad that parents are pleased with their children's education at Elmbrook--it seems that is the one thing we can all agree on! 

Pilgrim Park, by the way, was built in 1964. 

Uh, I don't think Pilgrim was built in '64. I started there in Jan 1960.

Kyle's reply: Thanks, Mick--since you went there, you would know better than I. So it is even older than I thought. Was the school just newly built when you went? Possibly 1964 was an addition then?

1964 was the date given to me last year by Bob Borch on a list of referendum history: December 1, 1964, $4,535,000, New & Additions to Junior High Schools and refunding other debt.

I had thought Pilgrim was the newer one, but it must have been Burleigh. Wisconsin Hills was built in 1970 as part of another referendum for $4,850,000: Two Elementary Schools (Hillside and Tonawanda?), One New Junior High School and Acquiring School Sites. What a bargain!

Kathryn, it's hard to define the monetary difference based on the content I've followed. I know the board added 2 sections in each subject for each high school. I think the HSST recommended 8 per core subject, so that would be a 25% increase that the board made.

I found documents confirming both numbers, but am not sure if I'm missing something in between.